Gaining a passionate, yet unguided knowledge for science, young Victor Frankenstein arrives at university with an unquenchable thirst for learning and advancement. When he involves himself in an isolated solitary experiment to create life, the resulting creature so appalls and revolts him, that he cannot contain his revulsion. The consequent rejection of his creation culminates in a series of tragedies that could not even have entered Frankenstein's imagination.
Theodor von Holst from 1831 edition source Wikipedia |
In fact, the first sentence of the book, the beginning of a letter from Robert Walton to his sister, gives the reader a clue as to the lack of awareness the scientist can develop to the world around him: "You will rejoice to hear that that no disaster has accompanied the commencement of an enterprise which you have regarded with such evil forebodings." In a frenzied quest for new discovery, the scientist can often lose any objectivity and will marginalize the prudent advice given by others, who have perhaps more objective insight.
In Frankenstein's story, we get a cautionary tale of the consequences of unexamined and incautious actions based on a deification of science, yet therein also lies a theme of abandoned responsibility. If Frankenstein had attempted to communicate with the creature and valiantly hid his disgust of it, would the outcome have been different? Could he have humanized his creation with sympathy and nurturing? I have my doubts. Upon the creature's flight and escape to the woods, he discovers a family living there and, by observing them, he learns to read and write and is exposed to profound literature, which reveals both goodness and evil to him. The creature learns what it means to be human and, in fact, admires the goodness of the family. However he ultimately chooses evil, using his rejection by humans as an excuse for his deviant actions. Victor Frankenstein was another unsympathetic character. Numerous times he had a chance to attempt to stop the evil he had created, yet each time he did nothing, often at the expense of a human life. I was actually quite disgusted with him. His inaction was almost on a level with the creature's atrocities.
Boris Karloff as Frankenstein's monster source Wikipedia |
The story of Frankenstein was birthed during a trip to Geneva in 1816. Together with her husband, the poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, Mary Shelley spent the summer there with their companion, Lord Byron. After Byron proposed that they each write a ghost story, Shelley found herself at a loss for inspiration. It was only after a conversation about the "re-animation of a corpse," that Shelley had a waking dream:
"I saw the pale student of unhallowed arts
kneeling beside the thing he had put together. I saw the hideous phantasm of a man stretched out, and then,
on the working of some powerful engine, show signs of life, and stir with an
uneasy, half vital motion.
Frightful must it be; for supremely frightful would be the effect of any
human endeavour to mock the stupendous mechanism of the Creator of the world."
And so Frankenstein was born.
Portrait of Mary Shelley (1840) Richard Rothwell source Wikipedia |
Here, also, are two other excellent reviews of Frankenstein by M. Landers and Majoring in Literature for your reading pleasure! Enjoy!
I really disliked this book, but I think part of the reason why is that I studied it and boy did we over-analyse all of the themes you mentioned. I think I would have liked it more if I had just read it for pleasure.
ReplyDeleteYes, over-analyzing can certainly ruin a book. Sometimes it seems like teachers make up themes, just so you can study them!
DeleteMight you want to read it again, someday? This was my second read and I enjoyed it much more than my first.
I also read this book for a class and while we did overanalyze it, I loved the story and thinking of how controversial it would have been when published. It's my own my list for a re-read one of these days.
ReplyDeleteI liked that Shelley was definitely a thinker and that the book explores so many interesting and pertinent ideas. I did find that the characters' actions in certain cases weren't that believable but were used to further the plot. In any case, given her age and considering the genre, I could overlook it.
DeleteYes, re-read it! I was glad I did! :-)
Thanks for the list of books she read!
ReplyDeleteYou're very welcome! The list looks quite intellectual. I can't imagine reading these books as a 19 - 25 year old. Wow!
DeleteI loved this book. I think it just so vastly exceeded my expectations that I couldn't help loving it. I need to read it again someday, though.
ReplyDeleteThere is some talk that her husband could have almost been a co-writer, but I believe Shelley denied it. These critics use the excuse that the book was so well-written and that she never produced anything to equal it, but taking into consideration her reading tastes, I'm sure she could have produced a book like Frankenstein without any outside assistance. Very impressive for a 19 year old!
DeleteA cautionary tale indeed. Great review!
ReplyDeleteThanks, Joseph! I really enjoyed this book and will definitely read it again.
Delete